One issue that seems neglected in the current Church, although it might be linked to inadequate catechesis on my part, is how Christians ought deal with government tyranny.
In a way I realize I’m rather late to recognition of injustice. Millions of babies in the womb killed over the past decades asserts to the fact. Yet many people, like myself, have believed in the goodness of America and have been thrown off-kilter by recent events that threaten freedom of speech, religion, that undermine the rule of law and our justice system. Adam Smith said, “there is a great deal of ruin in a nation,” but how much is too much ruin? How much corruption is acceptable?
Particularly appalling is the injustice around non-violent offenders related to January 6th. This is such a visible affront that affects the lives of over 1,180 defendants and the lack of outrage is offensive, whether it comes from Democrats or comfortable country club Republicans.
I sometimes wonder if virtue *has* to be the loser in the short and medium run, and winner only in the long run. Evil has the benefit of no guardrails as well as the element of surprise. The Soviet Union thrived for some 70 years before dismantling. Plus I read in an older catechism that bad leaders are sometimes sent by God to chastise a people — in which case it’s possible that President Harris is God’s plan!
Equally confusing are such disparate Christian approaches to recent tyrannies. St Maximilian Kolbe’s view seems to have been the polar opposite of Alexander Solzenheitzen's, based on the latter's haunting quote: "And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive…?…They would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If…if…We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation… We purely and simply deserved everything that happened.” Similarly there’s the example of Bonhoeffer in Germany.
I read an interesting book called “Why All People Suffer”. The relevant and potent chapter was about non-violence and how the victims must show the victimizers what they are doing in order to provoke their conscience. God allows suffering as a third way to get sinners to change (the first two being their own conscience and the punishment that results from bad actions). Jesus was the premiere example of this.
I think of this especially in regard to the "tale of two J6rs". One fled the country and received asylum from Belarus (to Belarus's credit, given the J6r would not have received a fair trial here) and another, named John Strand, who stayed and fought the charges and ended up getting a longer sentence by not lying and taking a plea deal.
As much as I cheer and cherish the little guy who evaded the police state by fleeing (a David v. Goliath story, although this David was not nearly as good as David and Goliath surely not as nasty as our Goliath), I realize that in Christian terms Strand chose the better path. He *showed* the victimizers what they were doing and pricked the consciences of those who still have one. The other fellow did nothing productive in terms of the spiritual realm.
Are these two J6rs are, in a microcosm, the difference between Solzenheitzen's approach and St Maximilian Kolbe's? Or is the idea that one solution fits all wrong in itself and that different souls will discern differently but no less accurately?